Références historiennes : l’historiographie acadienne contemporaine et l’influence québécoise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cette étude, l’auteur examine la nature des rapports qu’entretiennent les historiens acadiens des dernières décennies avec l’historiographie québécoise, et tente de comprendre l’évolution temporelle de ces rapports. Les rapports entretenus avec l’historiographie québécoise sont examinés à partir de deux cohortes d’historiens, l’une particulièrement active dans les années 1970 et 1980, l’autre dans les années 1980 et 1990. L’auteur tente, dans cet article, d’examiner l’espace que la production historienne et les sources historiques en provenance du Québec occupent au sein des ouvrages des historiens acadiens des dernières décennies, en comparaison avec d’autres sources d’influence possible. Quatorze textes clés issus de l’historiographie acadienne des dernières décennies ont été retenus, afin d’y mesurer le poids et la présence de différentes références savantes, historiennes ou archivistiques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".